League of Women Voters of California Education Fund
	Sonoma County, CA November 4, 2008 Election
	Measure K Reduce Wastewater & Water Rates City of Petaluma Majority Approval Required Fail: 11,954 / 45.4% Yes votes ...... 14,351 / 54.6% No votes See Also: Index of all Measures

Arguments For Measure K

Arguments Against Measure K

Vote Yes to limit the rate at which the City Council can increase the water and sewer rates to a cost of living adjustment based on January 2006 rates. Petaluma citizens who cannot afford five years of 15% annual increases in their water and sewer bills deserve fair and affordable rates. Keep our rates affordable. Based on the City's Cash Flow Projections and assuming continuation of a 3% average annual Cost of living index, with a Yes vote on Measure K the average ratepayer will: Save $422 in 2009; Save $537 in 2010; Save $670 in 2011. The five-year plan of the Water Resources Department is to spend $327 Million in capital, operating, and administrative overhead. By borrowing heavily, Petaluma is spending money at roughly twice the rate that it receives ratepayer revenues. This spending plan can be reduced by tens of millions of dollars simply by modifying the current approach and using better management practices with our groundwater and wastewater. By eliminating unnecessary borrowing, ratepayers will save millions. Keep our rates fair. Petaluma needs to control its spending. The cost of the new sewer plant has skyrocketed from $35 million to $165 million. And now the same management team wants ratepayers to pay an additional $55 million to expand the distribution system for the treated wastewater. Petaluma already recycles wastewater; it does not make economic sense to further expand this distribution system. Needless expansion forces today's ratepayers to subsidize tomorrow's Developers. The less fortunate ratepayers among us do not receive subsidized rates. That's not fair. The cost of living is high enough without excessive increases in water and sewer rates. The city's current rate structure is unfair and burdensome to ratepayers. Vote Yes on Measure K. Petalumans For Fair Utility Rates s/ James W. Fitzgerald, Community Volunteer, ­ Retired s/ Betty Jean Mazzucch,i Sandalwood Estates Resident, Retired s/ Bryant R. Moynihan Parent, Former Councilman s/ Dennis Gilday, Concerned Citizen Rebuttal to Arguments For As the City Attorney's Impartial Analysis makes clear, this harebrained measure should really be called the "Lawyers' Full Employment Act of 2008." Among many other legal woes, Measure K would almost certainly be thrown out in court because it violates the Contracts Clause of the United States Constitution by substantially impairing the City's ability to repay the $125,000,000 loan from the State of California to build our new sewer plant. The unknown is how much damage will be inflicted when all the legal dust settles. The risks are huge. Despite the fun-with-math approach of Measure K's proponents, what they don't tell you is that Petaluma's water and sewer rates are in the middle of the range for Sonoma County. Rates are rising up to the average because we haven't built a new sewer plant for 70 years. This is what clean water and cleaning wastewater costs in the modern era. For a typical home, the average rate increase is about 10% per year, not 15% as the proponents claim. The $35,000,000 cost figure ­ about what tiny Healdsburg's new sewer plant cost ­ is a fantasy because such a plant wouldn't meet modern discharge standards. The cost of the new plant ­ which is actually $50,000,000 less than the inflated cost the proponents claim ­ is consistent with the costs of new sewer plants throughout California. And every nickel spent on the recycled water distribution system will be recovered in impact fees on new development. Please vote no on irresponsible Measure K. s/ Bill Kortum, President, SONOMA COUNTY CONSERVATION ACTION s/ Ron Klein, President, PEACEOFFICERS ASSN.OFPETALUMA s/ Karla Schikore, President, PETALUMA DOWNTOWN ASSOC. s/ Dorothy B. Morris, Retired Eastside Resident s/ Frank Simpson, Retired Eastside Resident

Someone once said, "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." That describes Measure K perfectly. Frustration with rising utility rates is understandable. But Measure K's meat-ax approach is the wrong response. Measure K would impair water quality and could force the City to choose between compromising public safety or declaring bankruptcy. It's that bad. Even if the water utility cancelled all capital projects ­ including replacing old, degraded pipes ­ Measure K would soon have the water utility operating at a loss of over $1,000,000 annually. Petaluma's biggest water expense is purchasing water from the Sonoma County Water Agency, which provides almost all of Petaluma's water. So Measure K could force the City to choose between not paying its water bill or taking funds from police, fire and parks. The new sewer plant is 90% complete, replacing the old 1930's plant. The new plant will serve the community for 50 to 100 years with an environmentally friendly technology that exceeds standards for treating sewage. Its design went through rigorous value engineering to reduce costs. It's a great accomplishment. The money to build the sewer plant has been spent. The only issue is how to repay the loan. The initiative proponents wishfully hope that Petaluma can just stiff the State of California on the $125,000,000 borrowed for the plant. In reality, Measure K would create a $7,000,000 annual deficit for the sewer utility and could force the City to declare bankruptcy. Almost three-quarters of Petaluma's general fund budget supports police, fire and parks. Petaluma would face major cuts in important services if Measure K passes. Petaluma's budget is already lean: Petaluma's general fund budget per capita is $704, compared to $819 in Santa Rosa and $1,039 in San Rafael. Further cuts would be harmful. Please vote no on irresponsible Measure K. s/ Elece Hempel, President, PETALUMA AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE s/ Jay Halcomb, Chair, REDWOOD CHAPTER, SIERRA CLUB s/ Martin J. Learn, President, PETALUMA FIREFIGHTERS ASSOCIATION s/ Richard W. (Dick) Sharke, Retired Eastside Resident s/ Marcel Feibusch, Retired Eastside Resident Rebuttal to Arguments Against The City will be bankrupted? We will lay off police and fire? Our water will be contaminated? Such scare tactics are reprehensible and irresponsible. Don't blame those who signed the argument, because none of them actually wrote it. ln fact, they do not have direct access to the City's actual numbers and facts. These scare tactics were first used in the City Staff's "chicken little report" of April 2007. The City Finance Director who authored the report has since been terminated for failing to provide accurate information. The City Council was supposed to draft and sign the argument against this initiative but none of them were willing to publicly back such statements. The City has only received $100,000,000 of the potential $125,000,000 State Loan. The State requires the City to demonstrate how they will repay the loan before lending them money. And the City can easily debt service the State Loan with $19,445,000 in annual ratepayer revenues. Further, only net ratepayer revenues secure the State loan; general fund services (police, fire, parks, streets) are not at risk. Yes, the new sewer plant has been built. But there is no need to borrow excessively and waste the ratepayer monies on unnecessary future projects. Under the leadership of the new City Manager, Petaluma has an opportunity to reform its free spending ways and serve the citizens of this community with safe, reliable and affordable water and sewer systems. Vote Yes on Measure K to hold everyone accountable and to Keep Your Money. Petalumans for Fair Utility Rates s/ James W. Fitzgerald, Community Volunteer ­ Retired s/ Dennis P. Gilday, Concerned Citizen s/ Bryant R. Moynihan, Parent, Former Councilman s/ Betty J. Mazzucchi, Sandalwood Estates Resident, Retired

Full Text of Measure K

The People of the City of Petaluma do ordain as follows: SECTION I: The rate schedule for wastewater service set forth in Resolution No. 2007-023 N.C.S. of the Petaluma City Council shall be reduced to the rates established by Resolution No. 2002-189 N.C.S., which were the rates in effect on January 1, 2006. SECTION II: The rate schedule for water service set forth in Resolution No. 2007-022 N.C.S. of the Petaluma City Council shall be reduced to the rates established by Resolution No. 2002-191 N.C.S., which were the rates in effect on January 1, 2006. SECTION III: This measure may not be amended except upon voter approval; provided, however, that water and wastewater rates may be increased annually, starting with the next fiscal year following passage of this initiative, not to exceed the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose (1967 = 100) for the preceding published 12-month period. SECTION IV: If any provision of this measure or the application thereof to any person or circumstances is held invalid, that invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications, and to this end the provisions of this measure are severable.